«

why should this be so mad bloody difficult? All I want to do is add a few
lines of text to my hosts file to solve a unreachable website problem. I have
tried every way I can think of: logged on as Administrator, unchecking the
read only atribute, copying it to the desktop, modifying and copying it back,
using a "hoster" modification utility, short of yanking the hard drive and
slaving it to another system. Windows has this a read only file, and REFUSES
to allow me to modify it [hey who owns this computer? me or microsoft!] how
on God's green earth can someone modify his hosts file on a xp 64 system?

In article <6359882A-3E25-4A96-B873->, =?Utf-
8?B?SG9nIEdyYXZ5IGFuZCBDaGl0bGlucw==?= says...
>
> why should this be so mad bloody difficult? All I want to do is add a few
> lines of text to my hosts file to solve a unreachable website problem. I have
> tried every way I can think of: logged on as Administrator, unchecking the
> read only atribute, copying it to the desktop, modifying and copying it back,
> using a "hoster" modification utility, short of yanking the hard drive and
> slaving it to another system. Windows has this a read only file, and REFUSES
> to allow me to modify it [hey who owns this computer? me or microsoft!] how
> on God's green earth can someone modify his hosts file on a xp 64 system?

Could it be you are using a security software
protecting the host file ?

--
Poutnik
The best depends on how the best is defined.

no, I removed my av software, and disabled anti-spyware (and anything else
not necessary at the moment) with process manager.

"Poutnik" wrote:

> In article <6359882A-3E25-4A96-B873->, =?Utf-
> 8?B?SG9nIEdyYXZ5IGFuZCBDaGl0bGlucw==?= says...
> >
> > why should this be so mad bloody difficult? All I want to do is add a few
> > lines of text to my hosts file to solve a unreachable website problem. I have
> > tried every way I can think of: logged on as Administrator, unchecking the
> > read only atribute, copying it to the desktop, modifying and copying it back,
> > using a "hoster" modification utility, short of yanking the hard drive and
> > slaving it to another system. Windows has this a read only file, and REFUSES
> > to allow me to modify it [hey who owns this computer? me or microsoft!] how
> > on God's green earth can someone modify his hosts file on a xp 64 system?
>
> Could it be you are using a security software
> protecting the host file ?
>
> --
> Poutnik
> The best depends on how the best is defined.
> .
>

I had to add my personal login to the permissions and I just now saved a
change to the hosts file. I did not have any permissions initially.


On 2009-12-22 08:59, Hog Gravy and Chitlins wrote:
> no, I removed my av software, and disabled anti-spyware (and anything else
> not necessary at the moment) with process manager.
>
> "Poutnik" wrote:
>
>> In article<6359882A-3E25-4A96-B873->, =?Utf-
>> 8?B?SG9nIEdyYXZ5IGFuZCBDaGl0bGlucw==?= says...
>>>
>>> why should this be so mad bloody difficult? All I want to do is add a few
>>> lines of text to my hosts file to solve a unreachable website problem. I have
>>> tried every way I can think of: logged on as Administrator, unchecking the
>>> read only atribute, copying it to the desktop, modifying and copying it back,
>>> using a "hoster" modification utility, short of yanking the hard drive and
>>> slaving it to another system. Windows has this a read only file, and REFUSES
>>> to allow me to modify it [hey who owns this computer? me or microsoft!] how
>>> on God's green earth can someone modify his hosts file on a xp 64 system?
>>
>> Could it be you are using a security software
>> protecting the host file ?
>>
>> --
>> Poutnik
>> The best depends on how the best is defined.
>> .
>>

In article <52866A00-8CEB-49E8-9303->,
says...
>
> no, I removed my av software, and disabled anti-spyware (and anything else
> not necessary at the moment) with process manager.
>
Did you tried to check you VirtualStore folders, if there is file
remapping for hosts files ?

BTW, I was successful in editing it.
Your system may be twisted, especially if AV in out of the game now.

--
Poutnik
The best depends on how the best is defined.

In article <52866A00-8CEB-49E8-9303->,
=?Utf-8?B?SG9nIEdyYXZ5IGFuZCBDaGl0bGlucw==?= <> wrote:
>no, I removed my av software, and disabled anti-spyware (and anything else
>not necessary at the moment) with process manager.
>
>"Poutnik" wrote:
>
>> In article <6359882A-3E25-4A96-B873->, =?Utf-
>> 8?B?SG9nIEdyYXZ5IGFuZCBDaGl0bGlucw==?= says...
>> >
>> > why should this be so mad bloody difficult? All I want to do is add a few
>> > lines of text to my hosts file to solve a unreachable website problem. I have
>> > tried every way I can think of: logged on as Administrator, unchecking the
>> > read only atribute, copying it to the desktop, modifying and copying it back,
>> > using a "hoster" modification utility, short of yanking the hard drive and
>> > slaving it to another system. Windows has this a read only file, and REFUSES
>> > to allow me to modify it [hey who owns this computer? me or microsoft!] how
>> > on God's green earth can someone modify his hosts file on a xp 64 system?
>>
>> Could it be you are using a security software
>> protecting the host file ?


(Please don't top-post.)

Is your text editor adding ".txt" to the file name?

(Windows's default of hiding ffiletypes is evil, IMO.)
--
Al Dykes
News is something someone wants to suppress, everything else is advertising.
- Lord Northcliffe, publisher of the Daily Mail

In article <e#>,
says...
>
> I had to add my personal login to the permissions and I just now saved a
> change to the hosts file. I did not have any permissions initially.
>

Mysteries have often easy explanation.

Not necesserily related, but In Vista64,
when applications do not have permitions to modify file,
they often save it in VirtualStore, at this location has a priority.

In case of hosts file, it would be
C:\Users\USER\AppData\Local\VirtualStore\ _ wait for it ....
Windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts


--
Poutnik
The best depends on how the best is defined.

Top posting has become the default in this group. People that bottom
post tend to confuse the whole subject.

On 2009-12-22 09:32, Al Dykes wrote:
> In article<52866A00-8CEB-49E8-9303->,
> =?Utf-8?B?SG9nIEdyYXZ5IGFuZCBDaGl0bGlucw==?=<HogGravyand > wrote:
>> no, I removed my av software, and disabled anti-spyware (and anything else
>> not necessary at the moment) with process manager.
>>
>> "Poutnik" wrote:
>>
>>> In article<6359882A-3E25-4A96-B873->, =?Utf-
>>> 8?B?SG9nIEdyYXZ5IGFuZCBDaGl0bGlucw==?= says...
>>>>
>>>> why should this be so mad bloody difficult? All I want to do is add a few
>>>> lines of text to my hosts file to solve a unreachable website problem. I have
>>>> tried every way I can think of: logged on as Administrator, unchecking the
>>>> read only atribute, copying it to the desktop, modifying and copying it back,
>>>> using a "hoster" modification utility, short of yanking the hard drive and
>>>> slaving it to another system. Windows has this a read only file, and REFUSES
>>>> to allow me to modify it [hey who owns this computer? me or microsoft!] how
>>>> on God's green earth can someone modify his hosts file on a xp 64 system?
>>>
>>> Could it be you are using a security software
>>> protecting the host file ?
>
>
> (Please don't top-post.)
>
> Is your text editor adding ".txt" to the file name?
>
> (Windows's default of hiding ffiletypes is evil, IMO.)

In article <#>,
says...
>
> Top posting has become the default in this group. People that bottom
> post tend to confuse the whole subject.
>
Well, top posting breaks natural info flow
and is often used by posters
that do not bother to quote properly, or ever.

But, no matter what way is better,
I would expect for any thread
the best way is keeping the way it was used.




--
Poutnik
The best depends on how the best is defined.

Poutnik:
I've been in this group since the beginning when XP x64 went gold.
Top posting is common but not required. I prefer top posting, you prefer
bottom posting, neither of us are right or wrong it's just our preference.
The default in Windows Mail, Windows Live Mail and Mozilla Thunderbird is to
add the posting to the top just like e-mail does. It is possible to change
the default in the news reader to make it bottom post. Relax, enjoy and have
a great holiday season.

--
Dennis Pack
Win-7 Professional x64, Win-7 Enterprise x64, MS Office 2010 beta

"Poutnik" <> wrote in message
news:MPG.259b14ed58ab84ca9898a5@127.0.0.1...
> In article <#>,
> says...
>>
>> Top posting has become the default in this group. People that bottom
>> post tend to confuse the whole subject.
>>
> Well, top posting breaks natural info flow
> and is often used by posters
> that do not bother to quote properly, or ever.
>
> But, no matter what way is better,
> I would expect for any thread
> the best way is keeping the way it was used.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Poutnik
> The best depends on how the best is defined.